Andrews Corporation After Action Report

Table of Contents
1. Introduction............................................................................................................................3

2. Our Strategy...........................................................................................................................3

3. Vision and Mission Statement...............................................................................................4

4. How Strategy Implemented?.................................................................................................4

5. What was Planned?................................................................................................................5

6. Planned vs Results..................................................................................................................5

6.1. Production Analysis..........................................................................................................5

6.2. Internal Analysis...............................................................................................................6

6.3. Performance Analysis.......................................................................................................6

7. Difference between Planned vs Actual Results....................................................................7

8. Adjustments Made.................................................................................................................8

9. Lessons Learned.....................................................................................................................8
 1. Introduction

The aim of this report is to present the final report on the performance of Andrews Corporation

in form of the final After Action Report from the perspective of research conducted on its

financial statistics, stock and bond market summary, production analysis, traditional segment

analysis, performance segment analysis, annual financial statements, and several other aspects.

The upcoming parts in detail consider our strategy to conduct these analyses and what was the

vision and mission of all these. How we have implemented our strategy based on functional

analysis? The result that we want to achieve and that we have set in advance but what really

happened and how much difference was there in actual and planned results and how we

overcome the differences. The report discusses the performance of all rounds of Andrews

Corporation as well to analyze the overall performance of its products and how far it succeeded

in achieving its goals and competitive edge in the market.

2. Our Strategy

Two strategic objectives lie in the Andrews Team: adoption of a broad-based cost leader and

presence in each sector. By reducing the cost of R&D, production, and raw materials to a

minimum we will acquire a competitive edge. Reduced expenses allow for larger profits. Our

goods maintain pace with the market, provide enhanced dimensions and performance and raise

the amount of automation to decrease our cost structure.

While the Andrews team wants to keep prices and performance present on every market, we

want to gain a bigger proportion of the conventional and low-end sectors. A large number of

items that can draw on both markets will be put together by the R&D team. This is going to offer
us again over the competition. Our interest in these areas is driven by the possibility to earn

significant margins after R&D expenses and automation investment.

3. Vision and Mission Statement

Being innovative and competitive was our vision and mission. We aim to provide high-quality

but economic products to the customers while maintaining our production cost and high margin

to have a price differentiation strategy for our product in the market to be competitive.

4. How Strategy Implemented?

A strategy is a set of activities done by executives to attain the company's overarching aim as

well as subsidiary objectives. It frequently decides a company's success. A company's strategy

simply asks, "Where do you want to play, and how are you going to win?"Our marketing

strategy changed compared to earlier years. We started addressing our product prices in every

segment as expected by our customers while keeping the modest marketing approach in all

segments since we have analyzed every aspect. However, there is still a need for increased

spending levels in most of the segments where production capacity has already reached the 100%

level.

To make everything work effectively, it was important for us to revisit strategy in the production

area. Our production strategy was investing huge capital in the production process so we could

be able to decrease production cost and contribution margin can increase eventually. The strategy

was to keep the plant utilization under 150%. Our production transformation incorporates 1,5

months of inventory provision, which would provide a security margin and also a chance to
profit from the inventory of our competitors. Moreover, in the previous phase of automation of

the smaller and more traditional areas, we have actively spent our cash.

5. What was Planned?

As discussed in the strategy section, the plan was to improve ROS, ROA, and ROE of the

company as these ensure strong EBIT and profits for the company. The plan was how to improve

the production performance of main products or in our primary segment especially in Able, Acre,

Adam, Aft, Agape, and Ajax. The plan utilization in the Able segment was already 0% while

Adam was also underutilization while the remaining were being utilized fully almost. So it was

important to increase the performance of the underutilized production segment and achieving

that target will automatically raise the overall financial performance of Andrews Corporation.

Along with achieving high production at low performing segment, we have to compete with the

product of our competitors specially Daze that was already having the largest market share. We

tried to close as much with that product as it has a considerable role in the overall performance of

Andrews Corporation.

6. Planned vs Results

6.1. Production Analysis

The second year in the manufacture of our newest product Axe was our fourth year in business,

aimed at our favorite markets, low-end and traditional. Our projected goal for the year was to

gain 4% of the traditional market share, which we have gained 6%. This is because it was

carefully placed in the perceptive map of customers by making it desired data and by

successfully carrying out marketing work. In order to meet consumer requirements, we put the
performance at 7.7 and the size at 12.3. Our second recent Ace product did not do as we

anticipated to help Axe expand rapidly. Based on product drift rates we forecast that our market

share in the low-end market for Ace would rise from 3 percent to 4 percent; our calculations

have been exact, and we anticipate that this percentage will continue to expand in the future

years.

6.2. Internal Analysis

We struggled with intense competition in addition to our own internal advances. The Daze

product of our rival exceeded us with the biggest traditional market share. They have seen our

leading traditional product, Able, rise 2 percent over 1 percent. We remained near to the ideal

customer desires, and Daze obviously did, but they were cheaper than we did. In the next rounds,

we will have to look at Daze's adjustments and keep it up, so that we can recover the most share

proactively in one of our key target areas.

6.3. Performance Analysis

We made modest performance, size, and MTBF changes according to the specific drift rate of

each market on the perceptive graph for the rest of our goods. Our market share of all our goods

was projected to improve, which means that the performance of our product is expected to rise to

28% from 22%. We thought we weren't able to contribute because we caught only 25%. Edge,

our major performance competition product, has closed the 3% gap in our market shares and now

only behind us by 1%. This helped to avoid meeting the projected profits, we did not adequately

account for the movements of the rivals. The pricing points of our products are the same and we

suffered a bill, providing Edge consumers the second option of no brainer, boosting their market

share and reducing our share.

 7. Difference between Planned vs Actual Results

As in past years, thanks to our aggressive marketing efforts, we have seen numerous inventories

of our items. We have significantly reduced the promotion Budget for our key markets, both

traditional and low term, to avoid the stockouts this year and maintain our 100% awareness of

items. We finally cut our major goods on the Able and Acre marketplaces by 43 percent apiece

(respectively). Our decline in the promotion budget has been too dramatic and we have failed to

sell our projected six hundred units of Acre. We had predicted that 2664 copies will be sold, but

only 2091. Now, we have more than 800 inventory items, which increase manufacturing costs

and reduce contribution margins. This lack of sales led to unpredictable declines in all sectors

and was a key reason for our projected 19 percent market share reduction.

Cedar and Dell are our major rivals in the low end. This year both reduced their promotional

costs but Dell also boosted its sales budget and improved accessibility by 12 percent. In this way,

they were 25% to our meager 15 percent in the global low-end market share. In order to sell the

remaining 800 pieces of stock we possess and reclaim our market share, we need to boost our

promotion and sales budgets this next Year. We will also alter our projection to include these

units and not have to reduce our manufacturing expenses as much.

Pricing this year has followed the same pattern as in the past, decreasing by $0.50 per year as

expected by consumers. Our competitors also seem to be following the same guidelines, many of

whom are at the same prices as we are. Having the same or similar pricing on products as

competitors means that we need to place an increased focus on R&D, Production, and Marketing

efforts to regain our competitive advantage of a low-cost, ever-present company.

This year's pricing has followed the same trend as previously, which decreases annually by $0.50

as consumers expect. The same standards also appear to be followed by our rivals, many of
whom come at the same price. With items that have the same or the same price as rivals, we have

to spend more on R&D, production, and marketing to retrieve the competitive advantage of a

low-cost firm, which is always present.

8. Adjustments Made

In conjunction with our price and marketing approach, we feel we are well-positioned to

compete in the market and notably in the low-end category. In reality, from prudent long-term

growth to excessive aggression, our strategy has shifted. We feel that we have an amazing

benefit with our financial structure and stock price, by simply cutting prices to unsustainable

levels, from 70% of the competitors. We intend to achieve substantive market shares and

potentially establish a monopoly to increase prices even higher and customers will have to

purchase from us since much of the competition has been removed. It is not our job to implement

this plan but to achieve it through Round 8.

9. Lessons Learned

AARs are a way of evaluating what happened and why. They are learning-oriented discussions

that enable the team and the leaders of the company to learn differently. In addition, the

communication and feedback within teams themselves are improved through the post-action

review process. Since learning is the goal instead of being blamed, the process itself allows

people to better understand team performance and how best to work together to get a better

outcome.

This year we also come to know several other areas that need improvement. With our pricing and

marketing approach, as well as our product specs, we feel we are well-positioned to compete in
the market, particularly in the low-end category. In reality, our strategy has shifted from long-

term growth to severe aggressiveness. The analysis gave us many lessons to learn. First of all, we

learned that planned results or outcomes must be real means these must not unexceptional and

predictions should not be made. Secondly, double-check of every analysis is also equally

important else the companies failed in achieving. From the ARR we came to know we still have

to make progress in the production area especially as sometimes controlling production cost too

much can result in a decrease in product quality although contribution margin is being increased

on other end but that does not happen in every situation. Andrews has several strengths as well

especially in marketing, financing, and product positioning area but it needs to overcome its

weaknesses in the production area as well. From the acquired result we can draw the conclusion

that an effective strategy always leads to success for organizations. The same happens in the case

of Andrews that has an effective organizational strategy aligning with its vision and mission

statement.

This year we also learned that by making proper and real calculations regarding our own

products and products of our competitors, real improvements can be made, and eventually

maximum market share can be achieved.